NC DEQ Nixes ACP Erosion and Sedimentation Plan


The North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality has disapproved the erosion and sedimentation control plan submitted to the agency by the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. The Department’s September 26, 2017, letter of disapproval, sent to Atlantic Coast Pipeline, LCC on September 26, cites 17 specific deficiencies in the submitted plan as grounds for disapproval.

The ACP has until October 11, 2017, to submit a revised plan for consideration. If they want to contest DEQ’s disapproval, they must request an administrative hearing by November 25.

Meanwhile, in Virginia The Roanoke Times reported on October 5, 2017, that City council wants pipeline developers on hook for any sedimentation of Roanoke River. “The Roanoke City Council is calling on the state to require developers of the Mountain Valley Pipeline to either completely control sediment the project causes in the Roanoke River or pay for cleaning it up — at a potential cost of $36 million or more. The council passed a resolution Thursday to be sent to the governor, the General Assembly and the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. ‘Essentially, whoever dirties the water needs to clean it up,’ Councilman Ray Ferris said. The route of the 303-mile, $3.5 billion, 42-inch diameter pipeline from West Virginia to Chatham doesn’t pass through the city. However, it crosses the Roanoke River and its tributaries upstream from the city more than 100 times, according to the resolution. The river and those tributaries are already listed as “impaired” by the federal Environmental Protection Agency due to excessive sediment, and the city is in the midst of spending millions of dollars on stormwater improvements to reduce sediment and other pollution to comply with demands from the EPA. A consultant for MVP estimated that the pipeline project would increase sediment in the river by 2 percent — or about 1,039 more tons per year — which the city calls a conservative estimate. But even that amount would add $36 million in costs to an existing $78 million the city believes it will have to spend to comply with EPA requirements.”